1718
Coming to you soon... (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
530 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 20 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I know if I'm not wrong vanced got in trouble for using YouTube logo and reverse engineering the YouTube app. Revanced technically not breaking any law as it not directly modifying YouTube like vanced.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yeah, but YT can change the terms, and now blocking ads, its clear they are stepping up the aggression in chasing profitability.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    they've captured as many paying customersproducts as they could under the 'old' system, so now they're trying to squeeze more cash out every other source they can.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    I don't fully agree. I buy premium. As long as they keep it ad-free, it's a vote for a better business model, for platform, creator, and user alike. YT has had that option for years. Up to now, it was essentially voluntary.

    It's time to leave the ad-funded internet entirely behind us, and move to platforms like Nebula, Floatplane, Proton Mail... And yes, even YT Premium. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed they don't pull a hulu and try to double dip on both a sub and ads.

    If that happens, YT is dead to me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    I just can’t agree with the $73/month price for something I rarely if ever use. My grandson loves watching Elmo’s world on it on the tv, ads aren’t too bad yet, get like 10 mins of video before 2 30 second ads. But I refuse to pay google any money, they make enough off the android phones and all their ads they shove down your throat via websites, YouTube and google search engine

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I mean even if you pay for premium, they don't give you the option to not have shorts shoved down your throat. This is a "feature" that has been added after premium was a thing. It's also not too hard to figure out shorts are an optimized method to harvest more user data on interests.

    While I don't disagree with leaving the ad-funded internet behind us, I also don't trust Google to be a pioneer in reducing ads on the Internet— considering they're an ad delivering company above all else at this point.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    No one said we should trust a corporation to do anything, much less google. I've ditched chrome and encourage others to do the same every chance I get. But I also think Premium, YT Music, Android and Pixel, Google drive/office suite, are all reasons for google to rely less and less on their ad business.

    The challenge they now face, is the unwillingness of customers to pay. Due to google having relied on ads for so long, people are more than used to accessing their services free of charge. Just looking at the ad-block-blocking situation, they demand that they be able to do so. All the while rejecting even the ads.

    Ads will never be the long term play. Sooner or later legislation will step in, as people who actually use the internet and it's services like youtube, start getting into government.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent